[TomasBM]

It's fair to worry about the geopolitics of borders and minority groups, but this does not have much to do with a company placing its headquarters in a middle country where maybe (former) members of a controversial state could also work.

People believe all kinds of weird things, and that includes Russians. In secular countries, you're free to believe in what you want, but that doesn't mean you will or should be taken seriously. What a random Russian person believes doesn't matter, unless they have power and it has an effect on others.

Switch Russian with any other ethnicity or nation in the world, and you will perhaps see why the rhetoric of mixing geopolitics and ethnic politics with company policy (or even your own relationships) is not the best.

[Tadpole9181]

Kagi also kept using Yandex - a Russian search engine - despite many people explicitly requesting they not provide funding to imperialist invaders (aside the obvious question of censorship skewing result quality).

When they said no, and explained Yandex only gets paid when needed for a search anyway, people asked for a toggle to disable Yandex for their searches. That way at least they aren't funding it. Rejected that too.

Not going to lie, it is kinda weird how this is happening again.

[TomasBM]

I haven't followed the particular situation, but if it's as you say it, I agree that's bad company policy not to allow opting-out.

It's still a leap to conclude that "HQ in a neutral country" equates to or results in "Russian influence". The obvious stepping stones between the announcement and the conclusion of the parent comment would need to be that: A) Kagi (intends to) hires many employees of Russian origin, who B) live in Belgrade and C) also evidently and publicly hold imperialist views, which D) have an effect on the company and its product.

[jimbohn]

Note that this isn't "neutral" as in "I like chocolate" vs "You don't like chocolate". Sometimes being "neutral" is pretty damning, more so if you are providing a "neutral" ground for sanctioned individuals or people waiting the $CURRENT_GENOCIDAL_WAR out. I agree with you about not likely being there an A->B->C->D conclusion, but it's a signal about the preferences or lack thereof of the ownership of the company. But really, they can do whatever they prefer.

[jimbohn]

The "maybe (former) members of a controversial state could also work" carries A LOT of weight here. Given the connection with Yandex, I assume the company itself is A-okay with what russia is doing, since the company is working with what is basically going to be russia's wechat.

I disagree that what a random russian believes doesn't matter. And I disagree about the ethnicity argument. Russian is not "just another ethnicity". Countries bordering russia are now (again) under threat (or war) using "muh russian minorities" as a casus belli. Enough of them in a city/province/country, and institutions will start getting conditioned, from within and from without. I am a liberal, but there is being a liberal, and there is self-sabotage.

Deciding to look the other way, as a company, is just another signal about the owner of that company.

[TomasBM]

If you genuinely hold those views, and aren't just trolling, then I certainly hope you're not responsible for any hiring or people management decisions. If you do interact with people, I'd suggest talking to those you consider adversarial by default, in person. Things seem much more adversarial online.

"Enough of them" really applies to any minority, so if you think Russians are a problem-ethnicity today, there will be plenty more to choose from tomorrow. If you find it difficult to distinguish between manipulation of ethnic conflict, propaganda, and the role of an individual in a society, there's plenty of literature online. It's not blind tolerance or "self-sabotaging liberalism" to maintain a secular state and non-discriminatory employment policies, and to require your employees to leave politics outside the business.

Regarding your interpretation of the parent comment:

1. HQ in Serbia =/= HQ in Russia

2. Controversial use of Yandex =/= Russian influence or support of imperialist policies

3. Hiring of Russian devs =/= Hiring of devs exercising adversarial or imperialist views

And again, I still suggest you do the exercise: find another ethnicity others find controversial and adversarial (but you don't), and switch the terms in your comments. If that fails, at least be open about your views in public, so others can avoid you and your company.

I don't like nor support what the Russian government does, but I don't conflate those actions with those of Russian individuals or the people.

[jimbohn]

>"Enough of them" really applies to any minority

It does not. You are allowed to pick and choose. Try asking any Baltic country if they'd like 2 extra million russians, and tell them they are wrong because their argument can be proven wrong when abstracted enough. Try asking the Ukrainians.

>If you find it difficult to distinguish between manipulation of ethnic conflict, propaganda, and the role of an individual in a society

This is peak irony, I wish russians would read on those topics.

>Regarding your interpretation of the parent comment:

I didn't state those 3 points. But choosing to operate in Serbia, and choosing to use Yandex, are signals about the company that I can decide to operate on. Clearly the company is pretty "lax" when it comes to this. If they have choosen to hire disproportionately more russian devs ( I don't know), that would be another signal. Choosing to opere in Serbia isn't equal to choosing to operate in Russia, mind you. But still, it's a different signal w.r.t choosing to operate in another country, e.g. Poland. I don't have strong opinions against Serbian people, mind you.

>And again, I still suggest you do the exercise: find another ethnicity others find controversial and adversarial

Again, you are still leaning on the fact that, when abstracted enough, we can bend every argument. I don't support discrimination, that doesn't mean I appreciate getting members from an openly hostile society (to say the least).

>I don't like nor support what the Russian government does, but I don't conflate those actions with those of Russian individuals or the people.

Feel free to keep your head in the sand and live the fairy tale where everything is because of the russian government and not of the people. There are centuries of evidence that this is not the case. I bet you are from a country that has not been under russian rule in the past, or are ill-informed about the history of that society/culture. Not all societies and cultures are equal. "Things seem much more adversarial online", how arrogant. I'm fairly able to distinguish a tribalistic ethnic conflict from something that is not.

Try asking those seemingly complex questions I've asked the russian poster to any russian, including those living in the west. You'll never get a straight answer.

FYI, I've worked with (and hired) people from virtually all over the world, and traveled quite a lot (not vacations, long-term movements), never had an issue. Held friendships with people coming from countries with an "evil" regime, these were normal and kind people. For some cultures a brutal regime is an "accident of history", for others, a tradition.

[TomasBM]

> It does not. You are allowed to pick and choose.

Of course. You're allowed to choose your narrative and favorite scapegoat. That doesn't make it correct, or useful, or good. But it is useful to your government, I'll give you that.

The Baltic and Ukrainian friends and colleagues I talked to seemed to understand the difference between 1) what the Russian government says and does, and 2) what role their friends, colleagues or family of Russian origin have in that. The Russian and Belarusian friends and colleagues I talked to say they don't support their government's actions. Same with Israelis and Palestinians. So, unless they're all lying, or I'm imagining things, they seem to understand the nuance, even when it's painful or difficult.

I have much more in common with them than I do with any geopolitical warrior, whether they come from the government or just believe in that.

> that doesn't mean I appreciate getting members from an openly hostile society (to say the least)

Aside from the fact that this is a company, not a country, and there's no discussion of hiring let alone getting anyone:

If that's true, why wouldn't these apparently openly hostile Russians join their preferred army? Or do you think they are a fifth column in your country?

Be open about your conclusions. If all or most people of Russian origin are problematic because they come from an openly hostile society, what is your conclusion?

Do you think they should be kicked out? Should they be required to declare and prove allegiance to their host country? If they're as hostile as you say, why would you hire them?

What if they claim they're against their government's actions - are they lying, or should they have to prove it? What if they (falsely) believe in the propaganda of the Russian government - how would you ban this?

How do you feel about people from Saudi Arabia, Israel, Venezuela, the US for that matter? What about the Austrians, Germans, English or Japanese? Kurds, Palestinians, Cherokee? Their governments and/or minority groups have certainly been controversial in various countries and centuries, to say the least.

It's not an abstract subject, it's a question of principles and nuance.

> I bet you are from a country that has not been under Russian rule in the past

My country has been subject to plenty foreign conquerors, adversaries (real or not) and undue influence, including that of various Russian governments. Yet I don't see how the members of those other countries are guilty for that, nor how my hatred for them gets any justice for the pain of my ancestors (or the pain that my ancestors caused). And you don't seem like you have personal grievances that would at least explain your views.

But who knows, maybe scapegoating is more fun, and I'm missing out.

[jimbohn]

>Of course. You're allowed to choose your narrative and favorite scapegoat

No, that's not it. You are operating under the assumption that every culture is equal; it is not.

>I have much more in common with them than I do with any geopolitical warrior

Since this isn't your first ad hominem, let's get some facts straight. Apparently, you have: 1) Baltic and Ukrainian friends and colleagues, 2) Russian and Belarusian friends and colleagues. "Same with Israelis and Palestinians".

This isn't an attempt at doxxing or anything (you linked to some papers you co-author), you are a Serbian researcher working in Germany. None of your co-authors apparently have these origins, nor any manager/high level people in the company you are working for. I am sorry, but I struggle to believe you have these kind of colleagues, especially in such a nice area like ontologies, protege, etc. AND that happened to discuss with them in depth the russian situation.

I have a similar experience when it comes to Israelis and Palestinians, Belarusians, but not russians, I am sorry. The Ukrainians I know hate russians with a passion.

>Aside from the fact that this is a company, not a country, and there's no discussion of hiring let alone getting anyone

I agree, didn't imply that.

>If that's true, why wouldn't these apparently openly hostile Russians join their preferred army? Or do you think they are a fifth column in your country?

It's very simple, life in the west is better. That doesn't mean they believe in its values. Also, once the 3-day SMO got a bit too real a lot of moscow/peter russians decided to bail out. Would they have left if the 3-day SMO succeeded? I don't think so, they would have been happily chanting "russia strong". Yes, some of them are fifth columnists.

If you are still in doubt if the level of infiltration in Europe is through the roof, I don't know what to tell you. But the issue is that, even the majority of the non-fifth columnists harbor pro-imperialist russia values and resentment towards the so-called west. You'll never get a straight answer from them when it comes to these issues, in my experience.

>Be open about your conclusions

Please don't imply things. I am already open about my conclusions. My conclusion is that russia and russians are culturally unfit for being accepted into democratic societies en-masse due to centuries of brutal regimes known for their hybrid warfare and espionage. I think we should re-vet all "refugee" russian visas we have in europe, and reconsider the influence we allow oligarchs to have because they bring some blood money with them.

>How do you feel about people from Saudi Arabia [...] >Their governments and/or minority groups have certainly been controversial in various countries and centuries, to say the least. >It's not an abstract subject, it's a question of principles and nuance.

Nothing against them, not sure why you ask. It's you who decided to bring the abstraction up a notch in your previous comment, when saying "'Enough of them' really applies to any minority". And here's my disagreement. Russians aren't ANY minority, nor for their history, not for their culture, not for the implications of having a russian minority in your country. A minority is NOT fungible, because culture is NOT fungible, and history is NOT fungible.

>My country has been subject to plenty foreign conquerors, adversaries (real or not) and undue influence, including that of various Russian governments. Yet I don't see how the members of those other countries are guilty for that, nor how my hatred for them gets any justice for the pain of my ancestors (or the pain that my ancestors caused).

Serbia has never been under russian rule. Like other countries, it has its foreign invaders, adversaries, etc. But, again, NOT all adversaries are the same, because what they did during their history, what they promoted, and for how long, is not the same. Russia is likely in a unique position when it comes to the integral of applied brutality over time/people. It's not putin, it's not "the government", it has been like this forever.

>And you don't seem like you have personal grievances that would at least explain your views.

If by looking at past data (history, books, etc.) and current data (current state of russian society, their behaviour towards conquered Ukrainians, their nuclear-bomb threats every 3 days) you conclude that everything is fine and dandy with the russian people, so be it. That is not my conclusion. I do have personal grievances because the future of the values (and countries) that I believe in is at stake here, for real. I dislike people who are morally "flexible".

I've written a lot in this HN thread. I'll summarize my opinion:

- Culture and civilization are not fungible, thus not all cultures and civilizations are equal.

- I do not separate the responsibility of the russian people from its government. It has been too long.

- Vast majority of russians that live in the west harbor anti-west resentment and hold imperialist values. Those that left after the 3-SMO fiasco left because they risked their skin, not for any political reason. Will likely move back once this is over.

- I think Kagi having a Serbian HQ and working with Yandex is a signal about its moral compass. In hindsight, the latter is worse than the former.

[TomasBM]

It is doxxing, but whatever floats your boat. I'm not going to post the names of anyone, so if you don't believe me, up to you. Like I said, I can't know if you're genuine or not either. But if you are, there's some chance you could rethink these views, or at least be open about your conclusions.

But yes, these are discussions you can have when you meet people offline. If you live anywhere professionally attractive - like Germany - you'll get to talk with a lot of people. They're mostly not long in-depth discussions, but when you ask or express genuine concern about the situation, you get some responses. It could be a lie, or well-hidden hatred, or a skewed sample, up to you to decide.

If you're happy to spread this narrative - which you seem to be - then I think you fit the bill of a geopolitical warrior. You think it's right to treat all members of an adversarial country as adversaries before they did anything, and I think it's wrong/counterproductive/bad to do so, especially if you're not a member of your country's military or security apparatus or have a personal grievance which explains it. Currently it's Russians for you, tomorrow it'll be the Chinese, Americans, whomever, based on where you live and who now is the adversary.

Serbia has had plenty of experience with "undue Russian influence" and conquerors of similar profiles, but sure, it's not the same. I think the Russian government isn't very different from other imperial powers, which are notoriously not representative of their people, and problematic for neighboring states and their people. If this wasn't the case, Russians wouldn't be on your radar. Simple as that. You don't have to equivocate cultures to notice a general pattern in geopolitics, and you don't have to tolerate adversaries to treat normal people normally.

As far as those other examples go, ask an LLM of your choice, preferably in Incognito mode: "What has $COUNTRY done that would explain why others hate $COUNTRY_MEMBERS?" See what comes out.